As you will see, I take some of this very personally, and I considered not posting this for that reason but this, I believe, is too important.
Forgive the personal part if you must, though I think what's personal to me reveals an essential truth.
---------------
I received, from several sources, Dr. Richardson's latest video featuring his efforts to lead the new New Strategic Plan. The video certainly isn't a secret thing. It's the feature of the latest ERC Newsletter.
In it, Kevin encourages the people of the ERC to be about the work of multiplying disciples, leaders, ministries and churches.
I have three thoughts about what he says and how he says it.
1. I doubt Kevin's heart is in his message.
It was seven years ago, when Kevin was the Executive Director of the ERC, that we at Faith began our journey to revamp our ministry.
What we did was inspired by a desire to obey Jesus and to mimic the ministry of the early church.
Our refocused ministry was, secondarily, aligned with CGGC and ERC doctrine, and, the CGGC's Mission and Vision Statements.
To this day, the Ministry at Faith continues to embrace CGGC doctrine and Mission and Vision.
The CGGC Vision Statement specifically highlights the importance of multiplication and we have pursued multiplication.
Dr. Richardson's response to what we have done?
At first, Kevin ignored us. Ultimately, though, he fought us.
In the end, he became the mouthpiece for those challenging my credentials and, then, a cornerstone in the effort to expel Faith's multiplication-focused ministry from the Conference.
Amazingly, Kevin's letter to Faith announcing that it had been expelled arrived only two months ago.
Kevin's talk doesn't match his very recent walk.
2. You have to wonder, don't you, if Kevin even owns a Bible.
I've watched video several times now. And, I'd say that it is representive of Dr. Richardson's leadership of the ERC over the past nine years, in one way in particular:
Kevin, not even once, cites Scripture as the authority for what he is doing or for how he wants to do it.
The essence of what the Church of God does has always been, according to Winebrenner and even the 2013 Statement of Faith that, "the Bible is our only rule of faith and practice."
It may be our only rule of faith and practice, but, clearly, it's not Kevin's.
To listen to Dr. Richardson, the Bible plays no role in either the faith or the practice of the Eastern Regional Conference.
Many times over the years, I've described the mountaintoppers of the CGGC as hypocrites. This video provides a perfect example of that hypocrisy.
Why in the Word would a disciple of Jesus follow Kevin and the new New Strategic Plan?
Kevin supplies no reason. He doesn't cite Scripture.
3. Kevin's video is the incarnation of the the Characteristic of the CGGC Brand that I have labeled, Ecclesiolatry, that is, the worship of the church, not the Lord of the church.
Here's a tip:
If Las Vegas oddsmakers set the over/under line on appearances of the name of Jesus and mentions of the Kingdom of God at 1 in Kevin's video, BET THE UNDER!
On the other hand, I tried to count the number of times Dr. Richardson used the words church and churches but I couldn't. I ran out of fingers and toes with about 30 seconds left in the video.
The word church is absent from three of the four Gospels while the Gospels are filled with Jesus' teachings about the Kingdom of God.
Clearly, Kevin cares about the church. If he loves Jesus and the Kingdom of God, he doesn't tell us in this video.
----------------
From the top to the bottom and from side to side, we must repent.
And, based on this video, ERC mountaintoppers are still following their old and fallen ways.
I believe that my spiritual gifting, calling and empowerment is to be a prophet.
ReplyDeleteOne reason I think that is that my mindset matches that of the biblical people who were prophets.
It is a prophet thing to demand that belief and behavior be, to use an old but recent fad word, ORGANICALLY connected.
John the Baptist didn't only preach repentance. What he really preached was,"Produce fruit in keeping with repentance."
The core of my critique of CGGC mountaintoppers could be said to be that the mountaintop's professed belief and behavior don't connect--that they are, in fact, radically and fatally disconnected.
Hence, I am befuddled and confused by the way Dr. Richardson, who now says he wants to lead the ERC into becoming multipliers of disciples, ministries, leaders and churches.
At the exact same moment that the denizens of the ERC mountaintop would have been putting the finishing touches on the new New Strategic Plan, Dr. Richardson was, apparently, counting the days to the ERC Ad Council meeting in which the Council would take its final vote to expel Faith from the Conference so that he could send the letter expelling us.
And, yet...
Faith is one of the very few ministries in the ERC that has been dedicated to the principles of multiplication central to the new New Strategic Plan the mountaintoppers were preparing to present to the Conference!
John the Baptist would have stuck his head in Kevin's corner office door and said, I'm pretty sure, "Kevin, produce fruit in keeping with multiplication."
And, he would have meant that, if Kevin really cared about the Conference implementing a multiplication-focused ministry, rather than expell a ministry that had been committed to multiplication, he should, at least, take a serious look at that ministry before he throws it on the ERC dung heap.
Now, I understand that there were a number of issues at hand. I know that we, here at Faith stopped buying in to the mountaintop paradigm years ago.
But, YIKES!
That is precisely the point.
The ERC is shifting paradigms and...
FAITH IS YEARS AHEAD OF THE CONFERENCE IN LIVING OUT THAT PARADIGM!
Undoubtedly, we, here, have been a hard case, unwilling to suffer the tightfisted control of the mountaintop.
But, if the Conference is going to grow through multiplication, the mountaintoppers are going to have to give up the tight control they've exercised in the past.
----------------
Bottom line: As has been typical of the way of the Shepherd Mafia, its talk and its walk are tragically disconnected.
We must repent.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteDid I miss something? I don't see any scripture cited in your post. I see inferences but in my opinion some of what you infer is supported only by ignoring other Scripture that doesn't support your view.
ReplyDeleteTouche (a little Old French lingo, there, eh?), Lew,
DeleteThanks for your comment. And, good point.
I didn't cite any Scripture. For that, I am at fault.
As a member of the Enola First Church of God, discussing Church and Conference matters such as this, I should have.
So, I acknowledge my error. Do you think Dr. Richardson will acknowledge his? Will YOU acknowledge his fault?
In my defense, as a member of the ERC, I did cite the relevant church doctrine relating to the authority of Scripture and, as such, I was implying the citation of all the Scripture we've always cited, going back to Winebrenner from the first day of our movement.
However, you are correct. I could have--SHOULD HAVE--been more specific.
----------------
I've been clear about my revulsion with the old New Strategic Plan of 2015. The aspect of it that offended me most is that there were no biblical references in it at all.
So, the current ERC regime has a history of flaunting biblical authority and the authority of the Eldership, which we know Conference staff must submit to, according to the CGGC understanding of the church.
---------------
You, Lew, and everyone should know that, from the first days that the General Conference staff created the Mission Statement stating that the CGGC establishes churches on "the New Testament plan," I was begging Ed to call the Eldership together to formally define its understanding of the nature of the New Testament church.
As you know from recent CGGC history, that conversation is yet to take place.
----------------
So, to have the conversation I've yearned for for nearly a decade:
What Scriptures do you think that I am ignoring to support my own view?
Thanks for your response and I am replying now to the opinion I shared in my first reply. I add once again that is my opinion. I am not a prophet but I can speak authoritatively about my opinions. As Anne Lamott said, "My opinions may not right but I think they are or I would change them."
ReplyDeleteAnyway...
You have written more than once that Jesus only talks about the church three times and that seems to imply it wasn't that important. Well, he only talks about adultery 4 times. Following your line of thinking this would suggest it's no big deal. I don't think we can determine matters of importance statistically.
To me one of those 3 reference to the church (Matthew 19: 9 and 18) is quite important. "I will build my church...." and that is exactly what he did and is continuing to do. Acts is a record of what Jesus continued to do through the church. Is the church perfect NO. Is the church important YES.
I agree that we need to work for the Kingdom but we can't work for the Kingdom and ignore the church. I don't want to insult Jesus' bride.
Another thing you have implied is that meeting together regularly is not that important. Let me suggest that there are certain things we as a church can only accomplish when we are together. I refer to the use of the phrase "en ekklesia" that Paul uses three times in 1 Corinthians. (If three times isn't a big deal ignore this whole paragraph.)
"En ekklesia" is a term that Paul uses to urge the church to deal with issues that need to be dealt with as a body of believers. 1 Cor. 11:18, 1 Cor. 12:28 and 1 Cor. 14:28. In my opinion these three references stand out because they are not used that often.
This still does not settle the issue of how often believers meet but it suggests that there are times when the church needs to meet as a body.
One question before I add one more comment. I do not understand how mountain toppers can identify the leadership. Have you ever been to Findlay? No mountain there. How about Regional Hdqt? Hardly a mountain. And Camp Yolijwa? The mountain begins after you leave the camp. Camp Yolijwa is hardly on a mountain top. Any way the term as you use it is derogatory it seems. Unlike you I cannot discern intent. (See your own references to Kevin's intent.)
And one last thing; you refer to the shepherd mafia. If the Holy Spirit has not convicted you of such a term I am certain I cannot but you seem to question the whole idea of people being called to be pastors. So here is my question, How can you be in a position to question whether the Holy Spirit has called someone to be a pastor? If you say the Holy Spirit told you these men and women are not called to be pastors and they say they are called by the Holy Spirit you may be wrong, they may be wrong or you are all wrong.
I am struggling now with somebody claiming to speak for the Holy Spirit. And somebody must have misunderstood.
I recently downloaded a book by Viola and Sweet called Jesus Speaks that may help me sort through this but I know the Holy Spirit will not give opposing views to people facing the same issue.
Let's all repent.
Thanks, Lew. Fair comments and questions.
DeleteFYI, the next three days are looooong work days for me, longer than a geezer should have to bear.
So, be patient. I probably won't have time give your comments the attention they deserve until at least the third of the three days.
Blessings.
Lew,
ReplyDeleteI'll probably end up replying to your comments in posts that take them one at a time.
You are, no doubt, correct that Jesus only mentioned adultery four times. However, He didn't commit adultery either.
To three of the four Gospel writers, the concept of the church was so insignificant in the life and teaching of Jesus that the word church doesn't warrant mention.
One activity people in our tradition, in the Church of God engage in is, and I know this is technical and theological: Exegete action.
We pay attention to what Jesus and early disciples did as well as what they said.
And, according to the Mission Statement, we still do that.
As I pointed out, Dr. Richardson used the words church and churches more than 20 times in this video.
That fact suggests that something Dr. Richardson is doing is out of phase with what Jesus taught and did.
Also...
Jesus did not create a church.
He didn't hold church "services."
He didn't, as our shepherd mountaintoppers seem to suggest, send His followers out to plant churches. He sent apostles out to MAKE DISCIPLES!
And, in that way, Winebrenner and the early Church of God movement were in step with Jesus.
Winebrenner was clear, from the very day that those people came together under the name, Church of God: Their first focus was "the conversion of sinners."
Then, after sinners became disciples, our movement organized those Jesus followers according to the New Testament plan.
From the beginning, for us, discipling was primary. The "churching" of disciples together was according to the way it was done in the New Testament.
Preaching and converting and discipling were our true focus. Creating churches was done according to a carefully defined set of principles, but it always came after. It was the afterthought.
It was always secondary.
----------------
Please understand:
I don't diminish the importance of the church or community.
What I say and,repeat in the CGGC context, is that the mountaintoppers make an idol of the church.
Church was secondary to Jesus and the early disciples.
Church was secondary to Winebrenner and our early movement.
And, because church is primary to the mountaintoppers, the CGGC is not, ever doing what should be primary.
And, as we all now admit, the Lord of all authority and power and grace and mercy and blessing is not blessing the CGGC and the ERC.
---------------
You make the point that we can't ignore the church.
IGNORE?
Church is the only thing CGGC mountaintoppers are concerned with, as the video demonstrates!
What we need to do is put church in the correct place in our priorities...
...as, incidentally, the men and women in our early years did.
We have a wonderful history of doing it correctly...
...and of living in the blessing of the Lord as well.
We must repent of the sin of ecclesiolatry.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLew,
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely incorrect in suggesting that I think that meeting regularly is not important.
I think gathering is critical.
However, I don't think gathering is an act of righteousness, as institutional, shepherd dominated Christianity seems to imply.
I'm actually very comfortable with what you say about the importance of gathering.
I will say, though, that what most ERC institutionalists--and all institutionalists since the Middle Ages --understand to be gathering is not what happened when early disciples gathered...
...and, more importantly, the gatherings of early disciples served a completely different function in the lives of followers of Jesus than institutionalists' gatherings serve.
In the religious world dominated by shepherds, gathering, or FLOCKING, is a critical and essential act of righteousness.
Among early disciples, gatherings took place to promote righteousness, not to BE righteousness.
Early disciples gathered to spur each other on to love and good works and to build each other up.
They never gathered so that clergy members could provide religious products and services for the laity to consume.
But, let me be clear, among followers of Jesus, gathering is essential, absolutely essential!
One reason that I think that the Lord of all authority and power and grace and mercy and blessing is not blessing the CGGC, and institutional Christianity in the West in general, is that when those people hold "worship services," they are not gathering.
They consider what they do when they come together to be worship but, according to Paul at least, worship happens when disciples offer their bodies as living sacrifices, and, in my opinion, that act can't take place when disciples are gathered together. It can only happen when disciples are living in the world.
Our differences over gathering has nothing to do with how often gathering takes place.
It has everything to do with the purpose gathering serves...
...and with what happens when disciples come together.
Lew,
ReplyDeleteRegarding the metaphor "Mountaintoppers:"
The mountain is mountain is purely symbolic.
Recently, I've sometimes substituted the term "hierarch(s)."
It has struck me that some of the people who hold Conference and General Conference staff positions think of themselves as being above the rest of the body, and in a position that enables them to look down to see us, as if from the peak of a mountain.
As that point of view has set in, the rate of our denominational decline has increased.
This attitude, among some of the hierarchs is, very definitely at odds with the teaching of Jesus and the example of early disciples. And, clearly, the Lord of all authority and power and grace and mercy and blessing is not blessing it.
These hierarchs see themselves, not, primarily as servants of a Lord and slaves to all of the subjects of His Kingdom, but as leaders of an institution, of the church.
To be fair, they aren't tyrants. They see themselves as leaders and they want to develop other leaders.
But, despite what Jesus teaches about greatness in the Kingdom, that those who would be the greatest must be the slave of all, CGGC hierarchs chose to lead from above, looking down to see the rest of the body.
I am a student of revivalism. Trust me: The leaders of the great movements in the history of the people of God lived humble, often impoverished, lives.
They didn't work out of corner offices. And, their focus was Jesus as the One Who made Himself nothing and who humbled Himsel, becoming obedient even to death on a cross. Their focus was never on leading people or churches.
Our hierarchs are mountaintoppers. They are nothing like the people who joined the Lord in the work He was doing to expand the Kingdom of God in the world.
Our mountaintoppers seek to lead an institution, not serve a King and become slaves to all His people.
They eant to look down, not up, to see the Body of Christ.
Lew,
ReplyDeleteRegarding your query on how I can question if the Holy Spirit has called someone to be a pastor:
You bring either a ton of misunderstanding or mischaracterization to your question to the degree that it feels, tp me, like a, "Do you still beat your wife," question which is, in itself, a condemnation.
Having said that, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and do my best to answer it.
----------------
As I read the Gospels, in which Jesus prepares a group of men to be, not church pastors, but apostles--people sent on the mission of expanding God's Kingdom by discipling people of this world...
And, as I read the biblical book aptly known as The Acts of the APOSTLES...
And, as I examine the primary source material on the early history of the Christian movement, in the New Testament Epistles...
I don't see the office of the pastor anywhere, not even one time.
To frame that observation as you state state it in your question:
Nowhere in what Jesus did and taught nor in what the Spirit did among New Testament Christians do I see anything close to Jesus creating the office of the pastor nor do I see anything close to the Spirit calling even one person to work in the position of a pastor.
I do see Jesus talking, at length, about the callings to be an apostle and prophet.
I read about the Spirit-empowered work of apostles and prophets in the book of Acts.
And, I note that Paul says that God's household is built on the foundation of the APOSTLES and the PROPHETS, with Christ Jesus as the chief cornerstone.
And, I read Paul noting that Jesus will always give to His people apostles, prophets, evangelists, and shepherds and teachers...
But, I don't see a single pastor from Jesus or any other New Testament source.
That's how I can question if the Holy Spirit has called someone to be a pastor.
Certainly, the Spirit gives shepherds to God's people...
but, to be a pastor?
There's nothing about that in the Word.
The office of the pastor is a human creation, not the fruit of the work of the Spirit.
As I read the Word, it would be impossible for the Holy Spirit to call someone to be a pastor.
Someone He calls and gifts may be assigned to the role of pastor by the institution, as I was for many years, but the Holy Spirit didn't do that.
At least, He never did that, even one time, in the Word.
Just a quick note on the Dr. Richardson video that came out two days ago, June 22:
ReplyDeleteHe did mention Jesus AND he also mentioned the Holy Spirit.
I wonder if he got word about this thread.